Green and Bold: Take Packers Defense with a Grain of Salt

Is it fair to be encouraged that the Green Bay Packers defense put together a cohesive and effective performance against the Chicago Bears in Week 10, limiting them to 16 points and keeping them out of the red zone for the entire game? Absolutely. But let's keep things in perspective. 

Is it fair to be encouraged that the Green Bay Packers defense put together a cohesive and effective performance against the Chicago Bears in Week 10, limiting them to 16 points and keeping them out of the red zone for the entire game?

Absolutely. But let's keep things in perspective. 

We've been waiting for this unit to play to the level of talent it should possess (on paper, anyway), and it showed flashes of that on Sunday.

Nick Perry showed that he's worth $12 million a season, setting a new career high in sacks, with three.

Mike Daniels and Davon House each added another sack, for a team total of five, and an additional seven quarterback hits meant that Bears rookie Mitchell Trubisky was under duress for a fair percentage of his dropbacks. 

In his short career, Trubisky has demonstrated a lack of pressure awareness (32.0 passer rating under pressure in 2017), and the Packers were able to capitalize on that effectively in their game plan. According to Pro Football Focus, Trubisky went just 3-of-9 for 38 yards on throws under pressure. 

Those pressures didn't lead to any takeaways—but to win this game, they didn't have to. 

Turnover differential is a crucial part of the formula for successful teams, but you'd take a defense that executes fundamentals soundly with no turnovers any day over one that blows the game plan but nabs an interception or fumble recovery. 

Where Green Bay especially excelled against Chicago was on third down. The Packers have allowed opponents to convert 42.48 percent of their third down attempts this season, which is 25th in the league.

Against the Bears, however, the Packers allowed a 28.57 conversion rate. Green Bay didn't allow a single third-down conversion in the second half of the game. 

All of this is positive. On Sunday, this was a talented, young group playing cohesively as a unit rather than getting bogged down in communication errors, execution, and poor fundamentals. 

But we have to keep the opponent in mind. 

This Chicago team is 29th in the league in yards per game, with 291.6. It's scoring only 16.7 points per game on average (29th), so really, the Packers defense certainly should have held it to 16 points; if the unit had really been on its game, it probably should have held the Bears to even fewer points than it did. 

This is the same Packers defense that allowed the New Orleans Saints 485 yards and 26 points and the Detroit Lions 417 yards and 30 points in back-to-back weeks. 

“To continuously hear how much we’re not showing up, I think we stepped up today,” Daniels said after the game. 

They they did, and they deserve credit. It was a job well done—in that game, against that opponent.

But can they keep it going against the Pittsburgh Steelers in Week 12? The Carolina Panthers in Week 15? How about the Minnesota Vikings in Week 16?

At this point, it's not even necessarily about the Packers' remaining schedule. 0-7 or 7-0, whether Aaron Rodgers is able to play again this year or not, save for potential Day 1 draft selections in 2018, this is largely the defensive unit that the Packers will return in 2018. (Morgan Burnett and Davon House are two starters slated to hit free agency.)

It's important that this group learns how to win against considerable opponents, not one of the poorest-performing offenses in the NFL. 

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (67)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
The TKstinator's picture

November 15, 2017 at 06:25 am

More like two grains.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:50 am

I choose barley and buckwheat...Oh Tay!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
GBPDAN1's picture

November 15, 2017 at 11:59 am

We've been watching this D get shredded by any decent offense, and some not so decent, since 2010. An ok game against da bears , with a rookie QB, shouldn't get our hopes up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
TheVOR's picture

November 15, 2017 at 02:19 pm

Wait a minute, let me get this straight here, Perry had 3 sacks and didn't break something other than a person single game record?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ironman3169's picture

November 15, 2017 at 06:55 pm

Haha!! Good one!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 06:33 am

Great Article Michelle!

I completely agree with headline of the article. Take the defense with a grain of salt.

The Bears don't have a great offense. That is for sure. But they do have a great RB and one of the best run offenses in the league. The Packers did a great job of shutting that down.

The Packers defense starts with their 2 DT's. Daniels and Clark and they simply are studs. Clark has been a pro bowl player all year. Daniels appears to be fully healthy now. After seeing Ben Fennell's twitter timeline Adams really is starting to flash as well.

Then after that it goes to the OLB's with Perry and Mathews. Perry finally is able to use both hands again and you can start to see a healthier Perry is a very good player to have. Mathews while h hasn't had the sack numbers has been really good as well. He disrupts a lot of plays. Having Brooks back really helps the defense as he is a big upgrade over Fackrell. I'd like to see Biegel getting more involved as well.
After that Martinez has been pro bowl caliber this year. Ryan is a good run stopping ILB in the base.

The previous 2 games it felt like it was shell shocked from the loss of Rodgers. The defense had to get some sort of a confidence boost. I believe their play against the Bears the defense took a good step in the right direction against the Bears.
Sometimes teams just need something good to happen to regain some confidence. Hopefully beating the Bears will be that for this team.
Now it is time to see what happens against the Ravens.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:56 am

The defense is getting healthy again, so the excuses are going away. We're going to see what their ceiling is pretty soon.

Brooks is a key piece, IMO. By being available, they can move him and/or CMIII around and create confusion. It also frees things up on the other side for Perry. I don't think the pass rush will ever be great, but it should improve. Chicago is middle-of-the-pack in protecting the passer. Baltimore is meaningfully better, so let's see how they do this week.

It's one-week-at-a-time for this team.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:04 am

You are exactly right. The defense is getting healthier.
Getting Brooks back is a huge upgrade. What it also does is allows Perry and Mathews to get rest and not lose much. Whereas when Fackrell comes in there is a huge drop off.

I agree though. its one week at a time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:25 am

I think you hit the key point: it takes a much lesser player off the field in Fackrell. People like to point to CMIII playing the middle a couple years ago and the defense improving. I would argue the improvement wasn't due to CMIII being really good on the inside (someone said his PFF grade on the inside was decidedly average) but that it took a poor player off the field at ILB and put a better player on the field on the outside.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:30 am

I completely agree with you with the Mathews at ILB. They were much better at OLB then they were at ILB. Moving Mathews there added a lot of speed and pass rushing ability to the position.

One thing I noticed Capers doing more lately is running more of a 4-3 look. 3 DL with Perry standing up as a DE/OLB tweener. He has put Mathews at the SLB or WLB in the 4-3 and has Martinez and Ryan playing the other 2 LB spots. Its a nice change seeing him mixing and matching the fronts.

Having Brooks able to play though it allows Capers more flexibility. He can put Brooks, Perry and Mathews on the field together. I am looking forward to seeing what Brooks can do once he gets healthier.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:03 pm

Defensive linemen played 104 snaps out of the available 60 plays. That's 1.73 DL on the field on average. GB did play a lot of 3-4 early in the game, but they went to the psycho and played 1-5-5 quite a bit later in the game.

I've little doubt that we can stop the run against most teams if we play 3-4, but clearly Capers dared Trubisky to beat us with his arm, and Capers tends to play nickel when he possibly can. Up 10-3, with 10:57 left in the 2nd quarter, we were in nickel with Clark and Lowry at DL playing 6 in the box when Howard had his burst for 25 yards.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2017 at 06:59 am

Michelle does a good job of identifying Chicago's ineptness on offense, particularly from QB to WR. The Packers had the luxury of playing a one dimensional team. Hey, I am not complaining because at least they did it well enough to win the game.

Until we do it against a good offense with a good QB, I will remain skeptical. Our secondary is totally suspect and the coordination of the moving parts is weak.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:06 am

The Packers did have the luxury of playing a one dimensional team. But to be fair every team that has played the Bears have had that luxury. And not everyone has fared that well.

Bears beat the Steelers 23-17. Beat the Ravens 27-24 and beat the Panthers 17-3.
They lost to the Saints 20-12, Vikings 20-17 and Falcons 23-17.
While they have a losing record, they have played teams tough. While its easy to sit here and say we beat a 3-6 team, we have to at least acknowledge that they have 3 quality wins and weren't blown out by 3 teams with winning records. They were competitive in each of those games.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:51 am

Great post.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:05 am

Thanks Dobber.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:18 am

Yes, puts things in perspective, I must say.
What did the Packers do that some of these other teams didn't?
Or are the Bears just that inconsistent, and thus, not yet a very good team?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:27 am

I think it comes down to the fact that they ran the football and they stopped the run. It might not be any more complicated than that.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:06 am

Agree. Packers take away Bears ground game and forced Packers ground game to success... I think that was that simple..

Looking forward, Flaco is much better passer than Trubitsky, but he is interception prone gay. Packers should stop RB screens and ground game and catch few interception to win that game...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:29 am

I agree. The Ravens used to be more of a big-play team, but they're mostly dump-offs now. Still can beat a team deep, though, and they've got some experienced weapons on the outside in maclin and wallace.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Packer game plan looks a lot like what they played against Chicago, defensively.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:24 am

On any given Sunday any team can win. When you play a team is probably as important as any factor. The tale of the tape on Sunday November 12th is that our defense played well enough to win against an inept offense. And, we may get the same result against a struggling Baltimore offense if our D-line plays well.

Still, I wouldn't pick this defense for my fantasy football team nor wager any money on them. To this point, this is a confused, under performing unit with well known holes. So - I don't really care who the Bears beat or played tough against. The Packers still have a lot to prove in all three phases of the game - that is the stark reality of this team.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:48 am

You're absolutely right. Any given Sunday any team can win.

I'm not saying I would pick this defense to win them games or anything. All I'm saying is they did exactly what they had to do against the Bears. And they did a pretty good job of it truthfully.

Also, for a defense that has been taking a pounding perhaps beating the Bears will be a confidence booster for this week. We will see how they play against the Ravens.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:06 pm

I hope so. Our defense can be the antidote that gets us out of this funk.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:12 pm

FWIW, Chicago is averaging 18.25 points since Trubisky became the QB vs. 15.25 with Glennon.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

November 15, 2017 at 05:27 pm

The Bears have scored 150 points in nine games a 16.7 ppg average. The Packers held them to 16 - basically their average.

The Packers also had zero TO's last Sunday a stat that often significantly aides a teams in scoring. So without GB TO's leading to cheap points, they held a below average offensively challenged team to their seasonal average. (And the Cunningham fumble probably took 7 away from Chicago).

Not gonna get too excited about that.

Most of the respondents to Razers original post missed the point. It wasn't about whether the Bears can win games now and then, it was about how GB's defense played against a below average offense. And the answer is - meh, nothing special. Razer was saying he can't project great things going forward defensively from last weeks performance because the quality of the opponent's offense was so poor. Somehow that was glossed over.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
freddisch's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:45 am

Good article . I will believe the defense has turned around when they hold a lead in the fourth quarter.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:52 am

Didn't they just do that?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
freddisch's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:03 am

One game is not a trend. For the past 5 or more years this DC led defense has not been able to hold a lead or deliver stops in key divisional or playoff games

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:11 am

deleted.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:52 am

"Nick Perry showed that he's worth $12 million a season, setting a new career high in sacks, with three."

What's the over/under in minutes on a Taryn post?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

November 15, 2017 at 07:58 am

LOL, Dobber, I was thinking the same thing!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:37 am

1st was a clear cover sack,the 2nd was a tackle for loss but is credited a sack since the LT could have held and got a 10 yard penalty negating the sack and Trubisky possibly making a gain,the 3rd is the only one via effort...a better QB would have thrown it away. Stats,more often than not, hide the truth of the how and why's. Let's see if he shows up this week or takes another invisible man vacation.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 11:48 am

I have a hard time getting after players for making routine plays or easy plays.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:59 pm

Not getting on Perry as many always seem to believe...just attempting to keep his play in proper context...he's not worth the $12 million to date and likely won't be. Signed out of desperation doesn't mean justified.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

November 15, 2017 at 01:16 pm

I disagree, Thompson does not over pay and his homework must have indicated that was what others would pay Perry. Many OLB's in that salary range are "one trick ponies", just sack artists. Just take a look at how Perry holds the edge and strings out plays and his tackling form is text book. Early on he had only a bull rush, look at how he has improved, 11.5 sacks last year missing some games and with a club is impressive. In addition he should only get better, he is 27. It was unfortunate he had early injuries but in the long run that means he doesn't have the mileage on him others would have. He is worth the money.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

November 15, 2017 at 01:54 pm

Your opening sentence had me looking for the kool-aid to drink to understand this thinking.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 02:06 pm

His second and third sentences make good sense and are supported by scouting and evaluative data.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
fastmoving's picture

November 15, 2017 at 02:59 pm

first one makes sense as well

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:19 pm

What about your crush Fackrell? Is he panning out for you? Lol

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Censored's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:06 am

Fire Dom Capers please

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

November 15, 2017 at 08:29 am

How come when I said the Bear game would be meaningless, I got a bunch of dislikes? :(

Somewhat satirical comment:
I was sadly looking forward to getting beaten by the Bears and that causing DC to be fired. If they keep showing a little improvement, we'll never get rid of him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:00 am

winning a game and only giving up 16 points MAY be looked at as an improvement, but not so fast my friend...

Giving up 300 yds passing to a rookie averaging 125 is far from progress.

Having to sell out your pass defense to that 300 yd tune is not a balanced trade off for limiting the ground game, even to a good running team.

What team couldn't limit the run game by committing 9 to the box? That trade-off would limit Walter Payton, Gale Sayers, Franco Harris, Jim Brown and any other mere human.

But... What about the pass weakness you sacrifice? The numbers show that strategy for what it is. If a competent NFL QB was behind center against a defense that sells out on the run that much the game would be lost in a rout, kinda like the Lions game.

This defense is still under performing and it still seems to be on the leadership, scheming and game planning, not on the individual player performances.

Lets not start back-slapping quite yet.

I certainly do like what I am seeing from a few Packer defenders though.
Kenny Clark
Mike Daniels
Blake Martinez
Kenny King (when healthy, he is really hurting now)
Morgan Burnett (when healthy which hasnt been often)
NIck Perry (when healthy, which he hasnt been except for games 1 and 9)
Damarius Randall has even shown some improvement

OTOH we need to see improvement from
Davon House
HHCD (in a big way)
Clay Matthews (he needs to find a way to finish, he is always sooo close)
M. Adams (seems to be coming on)
Dean Lowry (where is the guy from training camp?)
Ahmad Brooks (he seems completely broken down)
RJF?, Q Dial? ( are these guys breathing?)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:22 am

That is the reality this year. No down vote here.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:24 am

I see what you're saying here, but I think this is how everyone is going to play the Bears: stop the run and force Trubisky to beat you from the pocket. If they can pressure him, he should make mistakes. The difference was that the Packers didn't get any of those. This has always been a defense that must force turnovers.

RJF was cut...now playing for the Pats. I think Dial was inactive, out with a chest injury. Did not practice at all last week.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:37 am

I agree with this analysis 100%. Great post.
Sobering reality.
I'll still be recording and watching later because I'll be in the woods, until I see changes that keep from F'ing-up my blood pressure.
That last game was more the anomaly than the rule for this D.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:45 am

I would say that the real anomaly was that the pass rush was getting home. Everything else seemed true to form.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:24 am

I wan to see Vince Biegel more in the lineup..and tske Jake ryan out and play Josh Jones in his place.

But, again this is all trimming the bushes...but the same defense keeps coming back no matter how many times we want to draft new players and make everything look nice when the defense lines up.

The problem is you have to rip the freaking bush out and throw it away !! That means firing Dom Capers. ..the Saints fired Rex Ryan 2_3 years ago and now that defense is starting to shine..FIRE DOM CAPERS!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:43 am

Josh Jones will NEVER take the pounding of a Matt Ryan, in the middle of this D. He will be leveled and injured in no more than 2 games.
That Nitro package is all a big gimmick that hasn't proven to be very effective. As I predicted, look what it did to Burnett. He hasn't played more than 2-3 full games all year because of the pounding he's not built for.

One interesting thing that's kind of floating around social media is Jim Leonard for defensive coordinator in the NFL.
Rex Ryan said he's the smartest player he ever coached. He's doing great things with WI, and the Iowa game was a perfect illustration.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:13 pm

...Rex Ryan said he's the smartest player he ever coached...

Don't know Jim Leonard but a Rex Ryan endorsement is a kiss of death.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

November 18, 2017 at 08:05 am

It would br nice to get a new coordinator. ..im fed up with dom capers. .

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
fastmoving's picture

November 15, 2017 at 03:10 pm

the Saints were lucky and had never Rex Ryan. But Rob was just as bad....

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since '61's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:34 pm

RJF was released over a week ago but my understanding is that he is still breathing. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

November 18, 2017 at 12:45 am

Thanks for the update, I will cancel his appointment with the grim reaper...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:20 am

Progress is progress. Still it won't mean much until we stop teams on 3rd down on a consistent basis in the playoffs. Our horrid reputation has been painfully well earned.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2017 at 09:31 am

What did Parcells say: you are what your record says you are? At this stage of the season, we know what the track record of this defense is.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2017 at 04:00 pm

Cookie for you.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:25 am

Your only as good as your last game...we beat da bears. ...and they almost beat us

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:52 am

When were the Bears close to beating us? Yeah, they came within 3 points, but never lead in the game nor threatened to take a lead.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

November 15, 2017 at 11:11 am

Wouldn't that fiasco challenge by Fox possibly have given the Bears the lead if they went on to score.....idk....perhaps I'm mistaken.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2017 at 11:15 am

At that point in the game the Packers were up 10-3. At the most it would have done is tied the game. Also that was at 8 minutes left in the 2nd quarter. There was a lot of game after that.

To your point though, who knows what happens if they get a TD there. That definitely changed that game.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

November 15, 2017 at 11:12 am

My two cents: it really comes down to the quality of the players that Ted drafted and gave to Capers to do something with.
1. Overall the D lacks quickness. Yes some of the d backs can run a 4.4 40 but do not have that first step speed, they need to get rolling first.
2. Our D lacks tackling and strength. There are no bone crushers on this team, the Vikes are loaded with them.
3. The D is confused with the multiple sets that requires thinking a lot and that slows you down.
4. Last, we have guys taking plays off. If they sense a run they let the game come to them rather than attack.
This D just lacks talent all around. Dix makes a play here and there, king too but they do not dominate play in play out, ditto the rest of them

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bret Iverson's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:39 pm

Agree but drafting late the Packers are taking some chances.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
White92's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:21 pm

Turbisky missed several open receivers in my opinion. I better QB puts up 24-28 points.

With Fox and by extension Fangio on the hot seat in Chicago, could the Pack replace Capers and hire Fangio? Might be interesting

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bret Iverson's picture

November 15, 2017 at 12:37 pm

The Packers D is the key going forward. Getting some consistent play and turnovers. They are not going to fire coaches this time of year. Focus on improved rookie play and stopping the run.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2017 at 04:07 pm

Great we have talent. Hope Adams and or Gilbert become part of the mix. As of now Packers are at best 19th Pick of the draft. Lets add some more!!!

Nothing wrong with compete, gain experience for some of the talented young guys and lose some games and get a higher pick. Better than NY, Look at the Giants, they are losing shamefully, but will be able to reset again,despite not developing any new players.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since '61's picture

November 15, 2017 at 10:50 pm

Look at the Bears game for what it is, a Win. I'm concerned about giving up nearly 300 yards passing to a rookie QB with a previous 125 YPG average and no receivers to speak of and Flacco coming to Lambeau with the Raven's season on the line.

The key going forward for the Packers will be the play of their OL. If the OL plays effectively, gets the ground game going and gives Hundley a chance we can keep our defense off the field which is where they do their best work.

We are getting the Ravens off a bye. They have not played very consistently so far this season. Their QB Flacco has been inconsistent. They will be playing for their season at Lambeau this week so we can expect them to throw everything at us. The Packers defense has a bad habit of providing struggling QBs with their best game of the season and sometimes the best game of their career. Will that trend continue with Flacco and the Ravens or will the defense make some stops and create some turnovers?

How well the Packers play this week could determine their season as well. If our OL can carry Hundley and the offense we have a chance but if we depend on this defense because they had a decent game against the Bears and a rookie QB our season may be done. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

November 18, 2017 at 12:50 am

Our season done!

Our season isn't done until we say it's done!

Was the season done for the US when Germany bombed Pearl Harbor!?!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 18, 2017 at 05:47 am

HELL NO!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.